Hi,

> 
> I just installed the binary package of ht://dig 3.1.6 onto a NetBSD
> 1.6.1 Apache webserver, and decided that the installation is less than
> helpful, in that lots of manual tweaking is required after the install
> completes.
> 
> 1)  /usr/pkg/etc/htdig/htdig.conf contains HTML elements referencing
> an alias of "/htdig/" but that alias isn't created by the installer -
> no httpd.conf entries are added for htdig. 
>

I would prefer a message to that fact at the end of the installation
cycle rather then having the installation process of htdig to mess 
around witht he apache config files.


> 2)  The standard htdig graphics only get installed to
> /usr/pkg/share/examples/htdig/, which seems the wrong place - surely
> they too would usefully go in /usr/pkg/etc/htdig/.  And there is no
> warning of that fact from the installer.
> 
> [ I added 'Alias /htdig/ "/usr/pkg/share/examples/htdig/"' to Apache's
> config ]
> 

Read hier(7). The /etc and /usr/pkg/etc filesystem are set aside for
system configuration and script files and not as suggested above for
application example files.

> 3)  The standard htdig HTML include files (header, footer, etc.) get
> installed to /usr/pkg/share/htdig/common, but you have to hunt around
> to find that out - again, wouldn't they be better placed in
> /usr/pkg/etc/htdig/ ?
> 
> It all just feels ... scrappy.
> 

same as previous comment. Application resources don't belong into 'etc'
filesystem.

> Finally, because I had umask 027 when I ran "pkg_add htdig*", many of
> the htdig directories & files did not have adequate permissions (owner
> root:wheel, perms 640) to be accessible by Apache - I had to chmod &
> chgrp many many things to make things work.  I'd have thought setting
> requisite permissions was one of the installer's jobs .. it should
> make no assumptions about the sysadmin's install-time umask.
> 

Traditionally, the root account has umask set to 022. Why blame the
installation process if you changed it to something else? The 
administrator is clearly to blame for the above problem.

> I only mention all this because it seems the installation experience
> could be significantly improved, and am tempted to suggest this in
> whatever way is appropriate - but ... I believe the NetBSD way is to
> avoid taking automagic actions that may not conform with the
> sysadmin's wishes, and leave most configuration to the individual - so
> automatic config tweaking might be considered inappropriate (different
> folks may use different webserver packages).
> 
> I'd be interested in anyone else's opinions on this.

NetBSD's philosophy is to play it safe. My guess is that there would be many
more email of this type if the installation process modified the configuration
of other system utilities and applications. The ultimate responsibility
is with the system administrator to correctly install and configure
system wide applications.

cheerio Berndt